Slashdot Mirror
For Us, The Living, by Robert A. Heinlein
The book starts with an excellent foreword from Spider Robinson, a friend of Heinlein's as well as a fan, and an excellent Sci-Fi writer in his own right. Spider lays it all out for you in the foreword: this book isn't strong on stories, it's strong on ideas. People who found Heinlein's later works too preachy should steer clear, as this book is probably his preachiest. Robinson speculates that Heinlein really wanted to convey his radical ideas, having just lost a political race, and spent too much of the book standing on the proverbial soapbox, and not enough telling a good story. He says that Heinlein learned from this, and went on to become a master storyteller, learning that people are much more likely to sit still for the lecture if it's embedded in a gripping story.
And that leads me to exactly what's wrong with For Us, The Living. There's very little story in it. There is a plot, and it goes like this. Perry, our hero, (n reality a thinly veiled version of Heinlein himself), is involved in a car accident in 1939, and wakes up in the year 2086 in the body of someone who looks very much like himself, but the original inhabitant of the body chose to end his life (shades of Stranger in a Strange Land here). Our Hero was discovered in the snowy Nevada mountains by a woman named Diana, who is a professional dancer and lives in the mountains. She takes him back to her place to recover, and they're lounging around her house naked by the second page of the book.
From then on, the rest of the book is primarily spent following our hero as he is lectured (literally at times) on the ways of the future, covering topics such as polygamy/polyamory, nudism, the stupidity of jealousy, economics, religion, and the treatment of criminals as patients who need to be cured, rather than miscreants who need to be punished. Many of the ideas that turn up later in Heinlein's books, especially his later books, appear here for the first time. The book is very much, as Spider calls it in the foreword, Heinlein's literary DNA. This is the primordial ooze from which the later books, (Time Enough For Love, Stranger in a Strange Land, Starship Troopers, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, and dozens more) are formed.
I found Heinlein's predictions of the future very interesting. Since the book was written in 1938-1939, the world hadn't witnessed World War II yet, though Heinlein predicts it. In his version, the U.S. stays out of the War, and Europe eventually self-destructs. Heinlein gets quite a bit of the future right, and quite a bit of it wrong. For instance, in 2086, they still haven't landed a man on the moon, though they're working on it. And, while in the future everyone has terminals (seen in later Heinlein novels) from which they can access live video and audio, information is still printed on paper and transported physically via pneumatic (and magnetic) tubes. But, given that it was written before the atomic age, those things are forgiven, and they're part of what makes the book interesting to read.
It's very obvious why this book wasn't published in 1939 -- it's not very good. Also, much of the subject matter is so controversial and sexual to this day that no major publisher would have dared print it then. The book is a bit rough, and a bit "off" in places. For instance, Heinlein uses a two-page footnote(!) to give us Diana's life story, rather than weave it into the story or the dialogue, something he'd never do in his later work, and the story only starts to get compelling in the last 50 pages or so, once the bulk of the lectures are past us.
So do I recommend this book? Yes and no. If you're a Heinlein fan, and you've read most, if not all, of his other work, then you'll love this book, and you should get a copy right now. It's a great snapshot of Heinlein's writing while he was still struggling to define it himself. If you've never read a Heinlein book, don't start here, pick up Starship Troopers, or Have Spacesuit, Will Travel. If you've read a few Heinlein books, read a few more before you try this one, especially Time Enough For Love, and his later works. I've read everything he ever published, and was sad when I finished off The Menace From Earth, as I'd run out of Heinlein to read. This book provided me with one more thrill, and it made me appreciate how strongly Heinlein held his convictions, and how far he came as a writer, from this, his first attempt.
Now that Bob & Ginny Heinlein have passed on, however, this is almost certainly the last significant piece of Heinlein's writing left unpublished, and for us, the living, it's fun to have something new from the Grand Master to curl up with on a cold winter night.
You can purchase For Us, The Living from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to submit a review for consideration, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
I've always liked his style. I admit that his main caracters were all essentally the same core personality, but I can truly say that I seriously enjoyed most all of his writing. This will be something I will get no matter what.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
1. Heinlein invented a maneuver that can save a person from choking.
2. There is no new SCO news today.
Heinlein's *preachiest* book?
Thats right there on my TODO list with:
i) Jim Carrey's wackiest movie,
ii) Todd Rundgren's most experimental synthesiser sounds,
iii) Elvis Presley's most sugary ballads
and
iV) JRR Tolkein's most esoteric back-of-an-envelope scribbling, lovingly -- and profitably -- edited by his hack son.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Is to make totally sure you've destroyed EVERY copy of a manuscript you never want to see the light of day, because after you're dead, some self-serving snot will publish it for the world to see and who cares about your wishes in the matter.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Probably one of the best writers of science fiction.
Ever heard of Red Plant or Starship Troopers? Stranger in a Strange Land?
He won Hugo awards in 1956, 1959, 1961, and 1966. He's had other works nominated for the award. He was published for over 50 years.
He also has written quite a bit of nonfiction.
The first novel of Heinlein's I read was "Time Enough for Love", and it made a huge impression on the teenager I was. I loved it.
Then I read "Stranger in A Strange Land", and I thought it was very similar in important respects, but I still liked it.
I went on to read several more of his books and short stories, and eventually I came to feel that he simply took the same central ideas, wrapped them in a thin veneer of different characters, and re-published them as a "new" book.
MAN, did I quickly grow tired of him!
(It did NOT help that I think his politics suck.)
Asimov is the Grand Master, not Heinlein. (In my opinion.)
"Don't blame the log for the fire." --Andrew Ratshin
Perry, our hero, (in reality a thinly veiled version of Heinlein himself), is involved in a car accident in 1939, and wakes up in the year 2086 in the body of someone who looks very much like himself, but the original inhabitant of the body chose to end his life (shades of Stranger in a Strange Land here). Our Hero was discovered in the snowy Nevada mountains by a woman named Diana, who is a professional dancer and lives in the mountains. She takes him back to her place to recover, and they're lounging around her house naked by the second page of the book.
Well, come on. The poor guy hasn't had an erection in 147 years. I'm surprised he waited until the second page to start getting it on.
Thanks for the review...I'll probably check it out, as I've read about 85% of Heinlein's work. However, you recommend people start with "Have Spacesuit, Will Travel?" I'm sorry, that was not one of his better works. It was actually rather...lame. The characters were weak, the story was extremely thin. Invaders from space? You don't say. Try "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress." That was far and away one of the finest books I have ever read.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
I read great heaps of RAH in high school and my early college years. One of my "first loves" in SF. I'm less of a fan now, and see a lot of his stuff as dated and politically cranky . . . but his best stuff holds up well.
Have Spacesuit, Will Travel was already mentioned. A great YA novel.
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. Libertarian moon colony vs. heavy-handed Earth authorities.
Time for the Stars. Under-appreciated YA novel about telepathic twins used to communicate with starships.
Waldo. Actually a novella. Genius-nerd with atrophied muscles, not satisfied with bedrest, builds . . . waldos.
Starship Troopers is a wonderful, obnoxious polemic.
Stefan
Please tell me you're trolling.
Taking the hook: Robert Heinlein was a science fiction writer who wrote a large number of books, most famously Starship Troopers and Stranger in a Strange Land. He was a libertarian who infused his books with political and social theory. His "Future History" stories 1939-1950 ("If This Goes On", "Methuselah's Children," "The Man Who Sold The Moon," etc.) trace the development of American and world culture from the aftermath of the "Crazy Years" (basically the sixties on steroids) through the early interplanetary age to a short-lived totalitarian theocracy and into a an age of world government, near-immortality, and interstellar flight.
The other famous novels (not really in the Future History series) are The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Job.
Heinlein had a good reputation as a guy who tried to help out struggling SF writers (one example: PKD) in trouble.
His book is on the front page of slashdot because SF is one of the core elements of what slashdot considers to be nerdism.
By the way, on social credit: one major proponent of social credit was the poet Ezra Pound, who ended up following that line of thought unfortunately into support for the Mussolini regime, treasonous radio broadcasts during WWII, and a long stay in St. Elizabeth's mental hospital outside DC to avoid a conviction on treason charges. Not the direction Heinlein went in, obviously, but an interesting comparandum.
If you're familiar with the word "grok" -- used to indicated grasp something completely, on every level -- you know Heinlein's work. The word is from Stranger In a Strange Land, arguably his greatest book, and a work that helped define science fiction for several generations. Heinlein's stories are classics; one of my personal favorites -- blanking on the title at the moment -- was about a society in which all citizens are required by law to carry guns. Duels are common, and everybody is incredibly polite :-). (I disagree with that objective, but I found the concept well-executed. As it were). Heinlein often exhibted a kind of crypto-fascist ideology on a certain level (read the book Starship Troopers and you'll get more out the humor within the movie), but it's not clear whether he actually believed it or was just being provocative. Sadly, much of his output after Stranger -- which came out in the early sixties -- was largely derivative of his earlier works.
grok:
1. To understand, usually in a global sense. Connotes intimate and exhaustive knowledge.
2. Used of programs, may connote merely sufficient understanding. "Almost all C compilers grok the "void" type these days."
2 1337 4 u!
Is to make totally sure you've destroyed EVERY copy of a manuscript you never want to see the light of day, because after you're dead, some self-serving snot will publish it for the world to see and who cares about your wishes in the matter.
Hey, we're already at the stage where Douglas Adams had an unfinished book recovered from his hard drive and published.
If you want to be safe, use a word processor on a computer that never connects to a network (could recover data on the network), restrict your copies to removable disk to those you would be happy being published or are able to destroy, and at some stage physically destroy the hard drive beyond any possible recovery.
In fact, do the same to *any* part of the computer that might (even temporarily) have held your data, including the monitor.
Paranoid? Well, I'm trying to second-guess information recovery in 20-30 years time, and I defy anyone to say that this will never happen.
Of course, the radiation from your monitor probably induced microscopic interference in the TV signal your VCR is recording nearby, and with advanced signal-processing and pattern-recognition, your great lost tome is recovered from an episode of Dawson's Creek you taped back in 2003.
Yuk.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
I was thinking this would either be a cruder version of his earlier work, or a polemic. The fact that he hung on to it suggests it was important to him, so I'd suspected it involved his prevailing themes (sexual freedom, personal responsibility, etc.)
Heinlein hated the direction he foresaw the world taking, and it came out more and more in his later works, when he could write pretty much anything and his publisher would print it. I confess to liking Number of the Beast, but lord Bob almighty, it certainly can't compare to Stranger or The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. I'm glad Heinlein took the time to refine his craft.
That said, I'm kinda looking forward to reading what sounds like a Mary Sue story that neither he nor Ginny would ever have let see the light of day during their lives.
-Carolyn
Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
And we all know that Heinlien was notorious as a raving libertarian looney. Hell, he's practically slashdot's patron saint.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Goddamn Heinlein,
Give it up! Yer supposed to be dead for chrissakes! STOP WRITING!!!
Give us unknown nobodies a chance huh?
Thanks.
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
The second, following We, the Living. It will be followed by Stephen King's We, the Dead. Then the series continues with Jerry Garcia's unpublished autobiography, For Us, the Dead. Finally it will be concluded with a Michael Crichton book, We, the terminally ill, but feeling better today. Perhaps there's still hope for a transplant.
If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
In Time enough for love, Lazarus Long goes to great lengths to teach his children the dangers of incest. To the point of inbreeded many generations of guinea pigs and photographing the deformed and stillborn pups.
In To Sail Beyond the Sunset, Maureen works hard to keep two of her children from being involved with each other. The book may be considered as an epic from the lessons Maureen learns as a parent along the way.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
possibly the most influential American writer of the 20th century.
No. The most influential American writer of the 20th century was probably ole Ez (Ezra Pound), another socred believer, and a treasonous bastard, who nevertheless dramatically affected the literature of the US and Europe from 1914 on, influencing Yeats, Eliot, Joyce, Frost, Williams, cummings, and pretty much every writer listed in your common literature anthologies after 1925. Next most influential American? Maybe Pynchon. You may not realize the influence they had on the way you understand books, but they did have a significant influence.
Heinlein was a great pulp SF writer, but his influence on SF, or literature and culture in general, was only slightly greater than Asimov's or Clarke's. Given the "harder" science of Clarke's work, I'd argue that he had more influence on the future scientists and engineers of the world than Heinlein. Rand had more influence on politics (to our undying regret), and Hubbard, well, his influence for the worse is pretty easy to see, isn't it? The person who really dominated SF in the 40s and 50s was John W. Campbell, the editor of Astounding/Analog who developed Asimov, Heinlein, de Camp, van Vogt, and many other famoust SF writers.
The most influential 20th c. SF *writer* might be Capek, who's important for more than just R.U.R. - he was an important figure in pre-WWII Czech (and European) cultural politics. I'd argue that the best SF writers who've gone were Herbert and Dick, with Heinlein and Asimov not that far behind, and that the best who are still around are Lem and Vinge. Heinlein is fun, and has a lot to say, but he has two major weaknesses: he's self-indulgent and repetitive.
Wasn't Heinlen the person who originally gave the waldo its name?
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
In addition to the geat novels others have mentioned here, be sure to check out All You Zombies, a (short!) short story that's one of the tightest time-travel tales you'll ever read. Originally published in 1959, you can find it in The Fantasies of Robert A Heinlein, a short-story collection. There's also a full copy online somewhere, posted by an English prof. for his class but accessible to anyone.
Start with "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress," "Starship Troopers," and then "The Puppet Masters." (Try to cleanse your mind of any movie adaptation you might have seen of the last two.
Then go back aways to his earlier books: "Revolt in 2100," "Waldo & Magic, Inc.," and "The Man Who Sold the Moon," and for an introduction to his long-lived repeat protagonist Lazarus Long read "Methuselah's Children." Then check out his juvenile works, "Have Spacesuit -- Will Travel," "The Star Beast," and "Podkayne of Mars," are all good, simple fun from the days of wide-eyed adventure SF.
Then, stop at anything past "Glory Road" (1963) with only two exceptions -- the aforementioned "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" and "Job: A Comedy of Justice," which is very different from most of his works. Starting with "Farnham's Freehold," the quality of Heinlein's writing starts to decline, in my opinion. Preachiness and an obsession with polyamory starts to just take over. Many of Heinlein's later books feature the character Lazarus Long, who is an interesting guy trapped in a terrible plot for all of the books after his first.
Avoid the following overhyped Heinlein books: "Stranger in a Strange Land," "Time Enough For Love," and "Friday." (The first two have some redeeming merits, but "Friday" is just dull.) Also avoid the following deservedly not overhyped Heinlein books: "The Cat Who Walks Through Walls" and "Number of the Beast." Both have very weak plots, and the latter is a nigh-impenetrable mishmash of all his previous books timelines.
Do not let the last part of Heinlein's career deter you from reading the earlier parts. He is definitively part of the Golden Age of SF for a reason.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
I really don't understand why so many people are crazy about Heinlein.
I have read Heinlein and found his work embarrassingly corny and dated. Contrast with Philip K. Dick, whose ideas seem uncannily (and frighteningly) relevant to our own time.
Stuff I recommend you avoid unless you find out you really like Hienlein is "The Cat who walks through walls" "Time enough for Love" and defintely "I will fear no Evil". Frankly I think all his Lazurus Long books except 'Moon' are trash.
"A Door into Summer" is a favourite of mine, and Its not one of the ones people talk about much. I wouldn't say 'Friday' is dull, its just mostly fluff.
Check out this site www.iblist.com for good reveiws of his work.
My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle...
When you're reading a Heinlein book and there is a scene where one of the characters drops a name and you GET the reference to a different Heinlein story...you're no longer starting to read Heinlein. At that point you're prepared for his best, worst and strangest works.
Heinlein is not for everyone. He was an intelligent, strong and opinionated writer. His characters reflect this with an "I'm doing it my way and unless you plan to TRY kill me thats the way its going to be." kind of attitude. Often people are intimidated or offended by that attitude. I'm a huge fan of it. While I don't agree with all of Heinlein's views, I have imense respect for the fact that he took the time to develop an opinion and effort to express it as he did.
Re: RAH's influence. I think it's pretty significant that during coverage of the moon landings, RAH was the 'color commentator' for CBS (iirc). Not Asimov, who wrote more (a _lot_ more) nonfiction science pieces than RAH. Also, RAH conciously worked at getting his short fiction into the Saturday Evening Post and the like, not just sf mags. Outside of the US, Clarke is probably a bigger influence on engineers, though. And you're right about Campbell's influence, Heinlein, Asimov and Clarke were the writers, but Campbell bought and published their work and to aome extent also directed the course. Obviously, he influence was greater on newer writers.
Also, Vinge does rock.
"Bugger this, I want a better world." - Jenny Sparks
every single major character in every single novel the guy ever published is just a thinly veiled version of the author
Johnny Rico? Jubal Harsaw?
Valentine Michael Smith?
Friday? Mr. Kiku?
Waldo? The Great Lorenzo?
Thorby? Joe-Jim?
The Unmarried Mother?
Podkayne, and her obnoxious brother?
These were all thinly veiled versions of Heinlein?
Nope, not buying it.
P.S. I think what's going on here is that Heinlein was always story-driven, much more than character-driven. Some people like that, some people don't. Unless the story happens to be about character development, characters in a story-driven story don't get as much attention.
But to leap from that to saying that every character is RAH himself in disguise is, IMHO, less than insightful.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
It's interesting to note how the quality of Heinlein's work declined starting in the late 60s. First his plots started to get a little disorganized, then a lot disorganized, until finally most of his books were little more than meandering rants. He was still basically a good writer, but he slipped into a lot of bad habits. I think he always basically an undisciplined writer, but when he was a struggling pulp writer, he had to accept correction from his editors. Once he became The Grand Old Man, he could escape that, and the result was often horrendous. Like early editions of Time Enough for Love, which weren't even checked for proper punctuation!
The Annapolis speech also mentions the only class he considered to have taught him anything about writing. It wasn't an English or Lit class. It was a command in giving orders, the motto of which was "Any order that can be misunderstood, will be misunderstood." Student of the origins of Murphy's Law take note!